The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Would a majority of fictional characters like earth?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/6/2018 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 476 times Debate No: 106447
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




Listen, I don't hate humanity, but I don't think many fictional characters would like the real earth, most fictional worlds have politics that are not toxic, no north Korea, our racism is worse than theirs, we like to make edgy jokes, and finally some of us would treat them badly because they wouldn't accept fictional characters in this world

(ps I know this debate sounds stupid, but I think its a good thing to debate about)

first round is acceptance, the rest of the rounds are just debating


I accept.

First, though, we have to ask ourselves exactly which type of fictional characters we're talking about here. Are we talking about fictional characters from worlds with VERY DIFFERENT societies, with magic and aliens and big blob people? Or are we talking about fictional characters who live in our world? 55% of all the movies ever made, I would estimate, aren't science fiction or fantasy, but are set in our world, with nothing fantastic or different about them. I think that most fictional characters in normal movies would be fine with living in the real world. Clark Gable's character in It Happened One Night wouldn't mind, nor would Cool Hand Luke, nor would Columbo, or any of the other realistic fictional characters. Please, clarify exactly what the limits are for "fictional characters". Then we'll get down to debating.
Debate Round No. 1


thank you for the question, the fictional characters I'm talking about the type of characters that have worlds that are different from our own, like have a different civilation and such, this means that characters from drama shows, and book that take place in the present earth, fictional characters from the past count, because they have a different civilization to ours.

and to start with the debate, I would like to say that most fictional protagonists care about the people more than the actual state of the country, this would mean that most protagonist's are democrats, this means that they would feel oppressed in a world where some are mistreated, in fact, science that their are ague ably more fictional good people than their re evil, I would imagine that the protagonists, and other characters with good hearts, would be disgusted with the treatment of civilians in north Korea and Libya.

if you wish, we can include fictional races in this debate. but even if we did or not, the fictional characters will undoubtedly be another race, which would lead for some of our bad apples to not accept them and harass them with racist names.

I can imagine there will be mixed opinions about the U.S president Donald Trump, while some would be completely neutral with him, undoubtedly some fictional characters might have a bad opinion about him.

fictional characters would definitely have mixed opinions on some political subjects, but I would imagine most of them would be uncomfortable about rule 34, I mean, why wouldn't they? imagine seeing yourself sexualized, or even having an affair with a close Friend, sibling, or someone you don't even know, some would also be very offended, or even threatened by hate art on tumblr or deviant art.

I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate, and therefore I wish him luck against me.


Oh, OK. I get the clarification. Just characters from weird science fiction and historical stuff like that. Although, technically, just one more clarification: If there's a movie about, say, Julius Caesar, his civilization is MUCH different from ours, right? But he's NOT a fictional character. he was a real person. So maybe we should drop historical figures too. Since, after all, they led us to where we are now. And they're not fictional.

I would argue that most protagonists in most books care about BOTH the state of country and the well being of the people. However, I would argue that the protagonist of a book is not always a good person. Just look at J.D. Salinger's Catcher in the Rye, Tennessee Williams' A Streetcar Named Desire, Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451. These characters, while they do eventually learn a moral, do very despicable hings before then. They lie, cheat, steal, and so on. Not to say that the characters in the first two apply to our set guidelines. I would just like to point out that, in the best novels, characters do have flaws, and are not cardboard cutouts. The main conflict of a good film or novel is not just good vs. evil, it's "more good" vs. "more evil". Just thought I'd point that out.

I don't think any fictional characters would hate Earth. They might notice some differences between it and their own fictional universes, and they might regard it as different, and miss their own worlds, bu I think they would find Earth a very interesting place full of culture and interesting things to do.

To start off this debate, let's imagine that a huge vortex opens up in the sky, and all the fictional characters ever created by man, excluding the ones living in our world, drop out. Here comes Long John Silver, here comes Macbeth, here comes Batman and Guy Montag, regardless of whether they're copyrighted or not, they come down in a huge mess, without any explanation. There goes Captain Kirk, Darth Vader, Zeus, Adam and Eve, Spider man, Cthulhu, Dracula, and so on and so on, until they all come out in a big heaping mess. This would, undoubtedly, be a strange event, but it must happen in order to start our debate.

I think they'd like Earth. Nothing is too bad about Earth. Certainly, if they landed in a ravaged Middle Eastern war zone, or within the barbed wire fence of North Korea, they would gather a low impression of Earth almost immediately. But, if they landed in 90% of the world, which is relatively civilized, they would like Earth a lot. If they landed in Europe, Russia, Australia, China, America, Canada, Mexico, India, Brazil, South Africa, or in any other civilized country, they would have nothing to fear, because, despite what the media says, most of the world is perfectly intact.

I don't think they would care much about the garbage on the internet. The internet is a place with lots off idiots, and most fictional characters, who have large intellects about things, would come to the realization that, while the internet is stupid, it's also a very useful tool for the accumulation of knowledge, and they would understand that, while there is garbage on there, it can't do them any harm. In fact, we'd see newer and more interesting websites begin to pop up, as people from alternate dimensions talk about their experiences with other fictional characters. The website would be much cooler.

I'd also like to bring forth the argument that, while Earth isn't perfect, many fictional characters would enjoy it more than where they used to be. Most of the people from the Maze Runner, Divergent, 1984, Brave New World, Hunger Games, Rollerball, THX, Mad Max, Fahrenheit 451, and Death race 2000 worlds would love Earth, because it would be much better than where they came from. We've made so many dystopian books and movies by this point that any starved peasant from ANY of those universes would prefer the vibrant economy and access to culture that our world offers that their governments refuse to give them. We also have less harsh laws and fairer governments. Much of our fiction has focused on the dark side of humanity, and where our follies could lead, so if fictional characters from those universes found our universe, they would like it.

Finally, aside from just dystopian media, we have to consider that, in order to create conflict within many of their novels and films, many creators chose to make their world a piece of garbage. I think that Bilbo Baggins would prefer earth, because there's less chance, of, you know, getting eaten by orcs or dragons or whatever. Harry Potter would prefer our world, because schools are much less dangerous. Most of the good guys on Star Wars would prefer our world because there's not a continual struggle between good and evil. Our world, compared to other worlds, is much more stable and safe. We have policemen, and firemen, and doctors, and things like that. There's less chance of dying.

That's all I have to say right now. I await your next argument.
Debate Round No. 2


I agree that we should have historical fictional characters not count, and now that that's done, I shall begin with my argument.

while I will admit 90% of earth is civilized and peaceful, I would like to argue that the politics in the world have been toxic as of late, and I think that the toxicity politics would be a rather shock to them, due to the fact that most fictional politics are as simple as this: protect the people, and when the characters notice some unhappiness.

plus I see that we both believe that the world is fine despite what the media says, but let me point our that the fictional characters just arrived, they are confused and need a source to find out what's going on, and what do they turn to? the media, pretty soon they will be hearing all this biased news, tragedies, that will give them a low first impression, thinking earth is exactly like that. most will also be disgusted by what's happening in north Korea.

plus we need to be consider the real life humans reactions, imagine seeing characters from books you read, games you played, or even that one cartoon you watched as a kid walking around a nearby block, some will be scared and try to avoid them, some will be scared and be rather aggressive towards them, while id admit some will have positive reactions, they say negative actions affect more than positive, depending how you were treated of course.

I also will admit that our world is better than some fictional world, they might be scared that earth is like the fictional world, now imagine this: you just got out of a world where your world made a mistake say like, littering too much, to discover another world, imagine having a sigh of relief that you can have a fresh start, only to discover a man littering in a nearby park, you might be paranoid that it might happen again, and later freak out.

Bilbo will be relived living in a world with out man eating orcs, that is true, but I can imagine he might be having lot of trouble dealing with electronics, in fact, cars are not in his world so he if he wanted to go somewhere else, he would have to walk, while you could argue that he has made long journeys before, so a trip to the store is nothing, imagine wanting to go to a museum to see some history in the new world he is in, but its 4 county's away, while that is also nothing compared to the treacherous mountains he climbed, I think having to walk long distances and back to his house will soon be an annoyance.

Harry potter would be glad to have a place where treacherous schools don't exist, he wouldn't have any currency to go into a new one, in fact, every fictional character wouldn't have any money to start new lives, while you could argue that the government could pay them, the chances of that is very slim, imagine having to pay every toon in existence the amount of money to buy a house? that whole government could go bankrupt!

I hope to see your next argument good luck to you


Very interesting debate.

I would argue that, while the politics in the world have been toxic lately, most fictional characters wouldn't care. Most of them wouldn't try to run for Congress, unless they were power hungry villains or had political ambition. Politics, while they do affect us in some ways, don't affect us in most ways. Just so long as they land in a civilized country, they can become citizens just like everyone else and buy stuff and live in houses just like the rest of us.

I would also argue that, in many fictional worlds, the politics are by no means simple. Many writers and filmmakers wish to leave a lasting impression on their viewers, so they try to make their worlds seem as real as possible, and to do this, they create complex worlds with many, many different things. If you watched The Hunger games, you would only see it as a movie, but if you were deposited in that world, you would find there was much more to it than simply a dystopian murder sport. It would be an entire world.

I don't think fictional politics are as simple as "protect the people, and when the characters notice some unhappiness." I think it's much more than that. Think about Game of Thrones, the immensely popular HBO fantasy series. It has so many characters it's almost like a soap opera. Four families, several fictional countries, lots of made up creatures and so on. George R.R. Martin didn't write a kindergarten book, he set out to write an epic fantasy, and to write an epic fantasy, there must be a heck of a lot of detail. Thus, it almost seems like another world, which is why I assume it's so addictive to people.

I implore you, sir, to stop making assumptions about fiction. Fiction cannot be generalized, it can vary immensely. There are many different ways it can be written, and many different genres, and many different levels of credibility, and so on. You can't boil all fiction down to a few certain principles. Anyway, let's get on with what we were saying...

Back to our fictional characters. Let's say they turn to the news, try to see what's going on in their new world. I would say their first impression of us depends on which news they turn to. If they turn to a pessimistic news channel, they would get a low conception of us. If they turn to an optimistic news channel, they will get a better conception of us. While most news channels are pessimistic, talking about hurricanes and shootings, others talk about nicer things now and again, like a black civil rights leader or some astronaut or something like that. Keep in mind that there will be many, many different fictional characters coming down, and they will all likely look at different sources of media to learn about humanity, such as the news channels, the newspaper, or even some history books. I would also like to point out that their impression of what's happening will be influenced by their personality in the world they came from. Batman will be appalled at a report of a school shooting, but The Joker will enjoy it. Oscar the Grouch would enjoy negative media, as it would give him an outlet to be negative.

By the way, most supervillains will be arrested when they attempt to commit any crime, since real police are much more capable than the police in the comics. There will also be the superheroes to keep them under control.

I'd say that humans would be pretty receptive to most fictional characters. It would be very interesting to see characters from books you read, games you played, or cartoons you watched. You could chat with them, discuss plotholes in their films, understand them a lot better. A situation like this is portrayed in the 1988 film Who Framed Roger Rabbit. It gets pretty interesting, but I won't go into it. If the fictional characters are discriminated against, they can always protest. Over time, we will become accustomed to having them around. Any major shift in world history settles down eventually.

I can imagine what the reaction of a character from a world where littering is a problem would be when he sees somebody littering, but I don't know of any film or novel with a concept like that. We are only discussing characters from real films or novels, correct? There is Wall-E, I suppose. If he saw somebody littering, though, he might just go up to the trash and pick it up. That's his job, it's what he was built to do. Heck, he'd be the solution to littering, he wouldn't be bothered by it. Also, let me point out that, in Wall-E, garbage is used as a METAPHOR for pollution in general, trash is not a major political issue. I'd think that, in Wall-E, trash is used as an allegory for climate change, since kids probably wouldn't understand climate change. Trash does not emit CO2, it does not melt polar ice, it's just ugly.

Bilbo would be heavily relieved if he lived in a world without giant spiders or rivers of lava. I don't think he'd have much trouble with electronics. He might reject them, but he might realize that electronics are more efficient than any of the medieval technology he's used to dealing with. I think he could learn to operate a car. Heck, if a 16 year old can push a few buttons and turn a wheel, Bilbo could, too. He'd realize, after a while of walking around, that cars go much faster and easier, so he'd buy one and cruise around in it. Pretty soon he'd regret not having one on his journey all around Middle earth, because in a car it would be a piece of cake. He'd also realize that human homes are better than Hobbit homes, since they have plumbing and electricity. He'd adjust. He'd have to, if he wanted to be a competent citizen here.

I think that fictional characters could simply attain wealth the way anybody else does-they could go in and ask for a job. This would double our workforce and make the 1% donate more taxes. It would kill a lot of birds with one stone. I'd also argue that a few fictional characters would already have money. Gotham city, while it is definitely not our world, is still part of an alternate version of America, so Batman would have a lot of cash on hand. I mean, he's a millionaire. Same for everyone in the Marvel universe. And Sherlock Holmes would have some pounds on him.

Anyway, that's all I have right now. I await your next argument.
Debate Round No. 3


How would most cartoons not care about politics? imagine falling into a whole new world, you realize that you need to check if there are any laws that are different than ours, so they would want to look into politics to see what the people think of the government, they would also would want to look into the history, and while doing that, they would discover a dark thing the country did, (America had slaves, Europe use to enslave Americans, etc) while some might be interested, some might be appealed.

while you could argue that politics is more complicated in fictional worlds, I would agree with you, but in most animated worlds, the story focusing more on the people, than they do actual politics.

while it is true that many characters would have different reactions, but keep in mind that there are millions of places they could turn to, and with stuff like CNN (its biased news in my opinion) growing, the possibility of a majority having a good first impression is about... lets say 43%

I didn't mean just littering, I meant worlds that were ruined by a mistake humans made, the characters from that world fell down to a new one, only to discover we are doing a similar mistake.

while they could get a job, it would take a little longer for them to get it, I mean, imagine someone you saw in your TV, asking to working in your printer factory? I would imagine you would have to think it over, to see weather the character could fit in or not, it would take a few days, that's a few days of a character without a job, and it could take even longer when other characters want a job in the same factory.

I don't think batman's or Sherlock's money counts, because his money is animated, while our money looks more real, so it would take a while before we make a law where animated money counts, and that's a huge if.

there are a lot of touchy subjects in the real world, such as abortion or wars, protagonists in the animated, kid friendly spectrum would feel rather confused with all of these complicated subjects. though people like batman would roll their eyes at it.

I wish you luck in the next round, and good day to you.


Most cartoons wouldn't care about politics. Dick Tracy might, a few others might. Dagwood would maybe watch the stock market. I think most of the guys in the comic strips wouldn't care. Charlie Brown is only 6 years old, he wouldn't care. Bugs Bunny doesn't care about who's in office. He just cares about handing Elmer Fudd sticks of dynamite. Who are we kidding? cartoons, out of all fictional characters, are the ones who would care the least about politics. Alfred E. Neuman makes fun of BOTH political parties. Popeye would only care about the navy. Mickey Mouse, I'm sure, isn't worrying about the GOP. They would look into politics, and they would figure out slavery. But then they'd learn about how we're trying to move past that, and think, "Hey, they're fine". Some cartoon characters used to be in blackface. I don't think they'd care too much about racism.

You seem to be confusing CARTOONS with FICTION. Remember, FICTION doesn't just involve cartoons, some fiction is played by real actors. Just thought I'd clarify that with you. Anyway...

I think that, in fiction, the story focuses more on the characters, but politics of the world wherein they reside affects how the characters look and act. Just like in real life. Politics affect the character. Without fictional politics, fictional worlds would be a very dull place. Politics are a very important part of all fiction. Also, whether the characters can defy the laws of physics or not.

CNN is very biased news, but what if they don't have cable? And what if they can recognize bias? Some fictional characters are smart cookies, I'm sure they could spot skewed facts. If Sherlock Holmes sees a news story about anthrax, you know him, his crafty little mind will start turning, and he'll look all around until he figures out if the anthrax story is baloney or not. Just like people, some fictional characters are stupid, and others are smart. They come in all different varieties.

I think it would actually be beneficial if characters from a fictional fable fell to Earth, and discovered that humanity was doing something wrong, something that could end all mankind. They could become political activists. If they've seen injustice, and realized that something is wrong, they can protest and do things until the issue is fixed. they could be instrumental in doing stuff. Wall-e could lead a campaign against littering, Lightning Mcqueen could push for fuel efficiency, Clarabelle Cow could tell people to become vegan.

I think Batman and Holmes's money would count. Are we talking about the cartoon batman or the Lego one, or the real one as portrayed by Val Kilmer or whatnot? There are lots of versions of him. I think that the Michael Keaton Batman would have some cash on him. Also, Sherlock Holmes, as I see him, isn't a cartoon. He's a real guy in Arthur Conan Doyle's books. You know, just a British chap. In the new movie, he's a gnome, but that's a stupid version of him. I see him as a real, non cartoon guy. Most film incarnations of him haven't been cartoons.

I think that many characters could just start their own business. Wimpy could make some hamburgers-he did it in the comic once. Dick Tracy could break off from the police force and become a freelance private eye. Many fictional characters have special skills or talents, and they could put those talents to good use. And if a worker chooses not to employ a fictional character "because he's weird," well, you know, they're a new minority, so they wouldn't stand for that kind of discrimination.

There are touchy subjects in the real world. I think most fictional characters could accept this.

This is a fun debate. Very philosophically engaging. I await your next argument.
Debate Round No. 4


Politics are just one of the many things that affect the character, there's love, conflict, the loss of a relative, heck, politics is the least of their worries in most stories. But when you go to a new world, politics seems like a bigger thing to notice, as such, most cartoons would notice politics and the toxicity in them

while it is true that their are some smart cookies, you have forgotten that their are some dumb characters, such as Patrick star, could Patrick believe a biased story when he believed so many other ridiculous stories? And there are plenty of dumb fictional characters as much as their are smart

while it is true that some characters could push for campaigns, you forget that their are people who stand against those campaigns, and when I think that the characters who lead the campaigns will be insulted because they will think that the people who think differently don't care of what happened in their world.

If you think that got everything covered, your probably right, except one thing, the critics of the characters stories, id imagine you'd wouldn't want to hear a guy saying your adventure sucks, or your friend is a Mary sue, or you are a bad character, id imagine plenty of fictional characters would be offended by that.

I had fun having this debate, and I wish you luck.


OK. Last round.

As you said, "politics is the least of their worries in most stories." So why would they care about politics in OUR world? Politics affect us SOME. I think politics would affect them much less, since they're outsiders. If we went to the Hunger Games world, we'd care about the politics, because we could potentially die at any moment. Our world is much less scary. We're a first world country. many characters from scary places would see their trip to earth as a well deserved respite.

Patrick might believe a dumb story. However, have you forgotten that, once he leaves Bikini Bottom, he'll be free from the tyrannical monopoly-dictatorship of Mr. Krabs? He can work elsewhere, and improve his skills, perhaps go to grad school, until, by a stroke of luck, he'll become a genius. Our world offers many more educational opportunities than fictional worlds do, as well as cheap colleges, so even the dumbest can become geniuses in a few years. After college, Patrick will be able to spot an erroneous headline a mile away.

I think that, if a fictional character ran for office, he would be appealing to all. Who wouldn't want to see Mario in the house of representatives! Certainly, a few fictional characters residing in our governmental system could pep things up. Politics have been dull lately. Nobody likes Donald Trump, but if there was an election between, say, Robby the Robot and Fred Flintstone, there would be no bias towards one candidate or the other, because both candidates would be wacky and appealing. And if each one had strong beliefs, then it truly would be an election to remember. People would vote again!

Fictional characters would demand respect in our world, they'd demand equal rights and equal pay, and they'd protest until they got what they needed. They're a crafty bunch, they could deal with critics or bullies from the press. You know Daffy Duck, he always has a witty retort. Anyway, I'm all done. Vote well, judges. This has been a very fun, engaging, and unique debate.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by frankfurter50 3 years ago
He'd talk about all the aliens coming in.
Posted by Minddagger 3 years ago
this debate is rather fun

imagine what trump would say on his twitter account. XD
Posted by Minddagger 3 years ago
PS sorry i had to reset the debate, a glitch happened, but i fixed it
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.